and many more benefits!

GMAT Club Timer Informer

Hi GMATClubber!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

Events & Promotions

Christina scored 760 by having clear (ability) milestones and a trackable plan to achieve the same. Attend this webinar to learn how to build trackable milestones that leverage your strengths to help you get to your target GMAT score.

Right now, their GMAT prep, GRE prep, and MBA admissions consulting services are up to $1,100 off. GMAT (Save up to $261): SPRINGEXTRAGMAT GRE Prep (Save up to $149): SPRINGEXTRAGRE MBA (Save up to $1,240): SPRINGEXTRAMBA

Most Helpful Expert Reply

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

09 Feb 2017, 12:32

19

38

nahid78 wrote:

Hello mikemcgarry,How are you?I am stuck. can you please help me out?I could eliminate D and E.I also eliminated B, as I thought "the release of" is better than "releasing"Did not understand the difference between "since" and "after"I picked C, as I thought "in" was needed, and As honeybee "was released" first then The "migrated".I think the pronoun "their" plays a role here, So i also hope that you might say something about pronoun too...

Thanks a ton in advance.Respect...

Dear nahid78,

I'm happy to respond.

The big idea here is that if a time interval is unmodified, then we typically use "in" or "for." Notice, that the modifiers such as "more than" or "less than" don't change the basic pattern. In three days, I will do XIn less than two years, I will do X. For more than six years, I did X. BUT, and this is very important, when the the time interval is modified, by a preposition or a clause, we do NOT need a preposition. Three days after the wedding, I did X. = preposition modifier More than six years before the French Revolution, he did X. = preposition modifier Less than five minutes after you called, I did X. = clause modifier Two days before you returned to town, I did X. = clause modifier

In this sentence, the time interval "three years" is modified by a clause beginning with a subordinate conjunction ("after" in (A) and "since" in (C)). Because it's modified in this way, it does not need a preposition.

Most Helpful Community Reply

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

03 Dec 2010, 01:31

8

1

12

study wrote:

Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, their descendents, popular known as killer bees had migrated as far north as Southern Texas.

A. Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil,

B. In less than 35 years since releasing African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil,

C. In less than the 35 years since African honeybees had been released outside Sao Paulo, Brazil,

D. It took less than 35 years from the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, when

E. It took less than 35 years after the time that African honeybees were released outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, and thencannot understand the verb tense agreement: 'release' and the verb 'had been'. Can someone explain after choosing the correct answer. Thanks

First, please make sure that you post the original sentence correctly! The non-underlined part doesn't make sense as written. The sentence should read:

Quote:

Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, their descendants, popularly known as killer bees, had migrated as far north as Southern Texas.

There's nothing glaringly wrong with the original, so we should either confidently pick it or scan the choices looking for differences.

If we choose to scan, we see that one difference is the opening phrase.

Let's combine the opening phrase with the final one, ignoring the parenthetical comments:

A) Less than 35 years after the release of X, their descendants had migrated as far as Y.

Sounds good!

B) In less than 35 years since releasing X, their descendants had migrated as far north as Southern Texas.

"Their descendants" doesn't modify those who did the releasing, so "since releasing" is wrong - eliminate.

C) In less than the 35 years since X had been released, their descendants had migrated as far north as Southern Texas.

"In less than the 35 years" is idiomatically incorrect. The proper idiom would be "In the less than 35 years" - and would change the meaning of the sentence - eliminate.

D) It took less than 35 years from the release of X, when their descendants had migrated as far north as Southern Texas.

"when" must refer to a time period; "it took less than 35 years" isn't a time period - eliminate. (The author could have said "It took less than 35 years from the release of X for their descendants to migrate as far as Southern Texas.)

E) It took less than 35 years after the time that X were released and then their descendants had migrated as far north as Southern Texas.

So many errors, so little time! The whole thing sounds horrible (always a good reason to eliminate a choice), the tenses don't make any sense and "it took less" certainly doesn't go with "and then" - eliminate.

General Discussion

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

09 Jan 2009, 04:32

9

2

Go with A

B. In less than 35 years since releasing African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, -- Since is incorrect - coz since means from a point of time to till date.C. In less than the 35 years since African honeybees had been released outside Sao Paulo, Brazil,-- same as BD. It took less than 35 years from the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, when -- from.. when unidiomatic. and pronoun it is unnecessaryE. It took less than 35 years after the time that African honeybees were released outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, and then -- same as D

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

04 Jun 2011, 19:36

7

1

3

sandipchowdhury wrote:

Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, their descendents, popular known as killer bees had migrated as far north as Southern Texas.A. Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, B. In less than 35 years since releasing African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil,C. In less than the 35 years since African honeybees had been released outside Sao Paulo, Brazil,D. It took less than 35 years from the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, whenE. It took less than 35 years after the time that African honeybees were released outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, and then

Let me give you my humble opinion.

B incorrect because, in part, of the misplaced modifier rule: whatever "releasing" is referring to needs to follow the comma after Brazil. However, "their descendants" (of honeybees) is unacceptable for obvious reasons.

C incorrect because "since" must be followed by an event at a particular point in time in the past (i.e, since 2000; since the release of the honeybees, since the honeybees were released). For this reason, the past perfect is inappropriate and you must use the simple past if you opt for a conjugated verb. Do NOT use the past perfect in the "since" clause, period. Also using "the" before 35 years is incorrect.

D and E incorrect:D and E do not need any serious discussion as they offer an awkward sentence construction not used in English. Avoid that construction at all times (it... ,when or it...,and then)Also "from" in D and "after the time" are not adequate in this context.

A is the correct answer.Less than 35 years is enough-No need of the beginning "in".A great way to check whether A is correct is to have the two clauses switch places; begin with the main clause "their descendents, popular known as killer bees had migrated as far north as Southern Texas and finish with the subordinate clause "less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil". This gives us:

Their descendents, popularly known as killer bees, had migrated as far north as Southern Texas less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil. This is indeed a correct sentence.

Now, try the same technique with the other choices and tell us whether you like the resulting sentence. Which seems the most natural and fluid to you? Finally, if A ain't broken, don't try to fix it.

I hope this helps.Bye now.
_________________

Dakar Azu is The GMAT Doctor.Dakar is an experienced GMAT teacher who can be reached at http://700gmatclub.com. He prepares aspiring business students thoroughly to get them well over the GMAT 700-score hurdle through his online GMAT courses.

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

04 Jun 2012, 19:05

2

Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, their descendents, popular known as killer bees had migrated as far north as Southern Texas.

A. Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, Less ~ is adverbial phrase modifying the next whole sentence, Correct.

B. In less than 35 years since releasing African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil,Releasing has no subject.

C. In less than the 35 years since African honeybees had been released outside Sao Paulo, Brazil,sounds like the African honeybees has been released at the same time as the killer bees had migrated.Making no sense.

D. It took less than 35 years from the release of African honeybees outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, when'When' makes the sentence sound like at the time which the honey bees were migrated, the release happened. no sense.

E. It took less than 35 years after the time that African honeybees were released outside Sao Paulo, Brazil, and then

'and then' sounds like there's a time sequence. The release -> migration. No sense.
_________________

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

09 Feb 2017, 08:52

Hello mikemcgarry,How are you?I am stuck. can you please help me out?I could eliminate D and E.I also eliminated B, as I thought "the release of" is better than "releasing"Did not understand the difference between "since" and "after"I picked C, as I thought "in" was needed, and As honeybee "was released" first then The "migrated".I think the pronoun "their" plays a role here, So i also hope that you might say something about pronoun too...

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

10 Feb 2017, 02:49

mikemcgarry wrote:

Dear nahid78,

I'm happy to respond.

The big idea here is that if a time interval is unmodified, then we typically use "in" or "for." Notice, that the modifiers such as "more than" or "less than" don't change the basic pattern. In three days, I will do XIn less than two years, I will do X. For more than six years, I did X. BUT, and this is very important, when the the time interval is modified, by a preposition or a clause, we do NOT need a preposition. Three days after the wedding, I did X. = preposition modifier More than six years before the French Revolution, he did X. = preposition modifier Less than five minutes after you called, I did X. = clause modifier Two days before you returned to town, I did X. = clause modifier

In this sentence, the time interval "three years" is modified by a clause beginning with a subordinate conjunction ("after" in (A) and "since" in (C)). Because it's modified in this way, it does not need a preposition.

Does all this make sense?Mike

Dear Mike,

I'm little bit confused about 'less than' in this question.

Why do not we use ' fewer than 3 years'? Is not 'years' countable word?

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

10 Feb 2017, 13:09

4

3

Mo2men wrote:

Dear Mike,

I'm little bit confused about 'less than' in this question.

Why do not we use ' fewer than 3 years'? Is not 'years' countable word?

Thanks

Dear Mo2men,

I'm happy to respond.

The general rule, as you well know, is "fewer" for countable nouns and "less" for uncountable nouns.

A curious idiomatic exception to this pattern concerns units. Some units are so frequently used that they are, as it were, proxies for what they measure. Of course, the unit themselves are countable, but what they measure is typically uncountable. Thus"less than $10" really means "less money than $10" "less than seven hours" really means "less time than seven hours" "less than five miles" really means "less distance than five miles" "less than 25 lbs" really means "less weight than 25 lbs"

You see, when we are talking about a time of about 3 years, we are not really talking about three separate countable things: we are just talking about a continuous bulk of time. We would only talk about years as countable, say, if were were talking about something that very specifically happened just once a year, such as a big annual award. For example, For the eight years inclusive from 1938 to 1945, the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded in fewer than half of those years. In this context, the each year is a separate and countable thing. This is not how we are talking about time when we just want to know, how long did X last?

That last paragraph deals with subtleties far beyond what the GMAT is likely to test.

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

10 Feb 2017, 21:44

1

mikemcgarry wrote:

Dear nahid78,

I'm happy to respond.

The big idea here is that if a time interval is unmodified, then we typically use "in" or "for." Notice, that the modifiers such as "more than" or "less than" don't change the basic pattern. In three days, I will do XIn less than two years, I will do X. For more than six years, I did X. BUT, and this is very important, when the the time interval is modified, by a preposition or a clause, we do NOT need a preposition. Three days after the wedding, I did X. = preposition modifier More than six years before the French Revolution, he did X. = preposition modifier Less than five minutes after you called, I did X. = clause modifier Two days before you returned to town, I did X. = clause modifier

In this sentence, the time interval "three years" is modified by a clause beginning with a subordinate conjunction ("after" in (A) and "since" in (C)). Because it's modified in this way, it does not need a preposition.

Does all this make sense?Mike

Yes I understand now. Thank you very much.But can you please share something about the use of "past participle" in option "C". Is C wrong because of the preposition "In" or "had been released" is also wrong?Thanks again...
_________________

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

11 Feb 2017, 14:27

2

nahid78 wrote:

Yes I understand now. Thank you very much.But can you please share something about the use of "past participle" in option "C". Is C wrong because of the preposition "In" or "had been released" is also wrong?Thanks again...

Dear nahid78,

I'm happy to respond.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with the grammar in (C)--it's 100% grammatically correct. It's just a bit wordy, a longer and less powerful way of saying the same thing that (A) says, but (A) is sleek, efficient, and direct.

Grammar is only one of the considerations on the GMAT SC. The GMAT loves to construct grammatically correct options that are wrong because of logical or rhetorical problems.

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

12 Feb 2017, 04:33

1

mikemcgarry wrote:

nahid78 wrote:

Yes I understand now. Thank you very much.But can you please share something about the use of "past participle" in option "C". Is C wrong because of the preposition "In" or "had been released" is also wrong?Thanks again...

Dear nahid78,

I'm happy to respond.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with the grammar in (C)--it's 100% grammatically correct. It's just a bit wordy, a longer and less powerful way of saying the same thing that (A) says, but (A) is sleek, efficient, and direct.

Grammar is only one of the considerations on the GMAT SC. The GMAT loves to construct grammatically correct options that are wrong because of logical or rhetorical problems.

Does all this make sense?Mike

Dear Mike,

I got confused by your reply above about choice C. You just have eliminated C in earlier post because 'when the the time interval is modified, by a preposition or a clause, we do NOT need a preposition.'

Also, is the following construction grammatically correct?

since+past perfect, main clause with past perfect.

As I learned before, 'since' is used to give it must refer to a DEFINITE MOMENT in the past such as: since June, since 1990

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

13 Feb 2017, 12:16

2

Mo2men wrote:

Dear Mike,

I got confused by your reply above about choice C. You just have eliminated C in earlier post because 'when the the time interval is modified, by a preposition or a clause, we do NOT need a preposition.'

Also, is the following construction grammatically correct?

since+past perfect, main clause with past perfect.

As I learned before, 'since' is used to give it must refer to a DEFINITE MOMENT in the past such as: since June, since 1990

Can you clarify please?

Dear Mo2men,

I'm happy to respond.

We are going deep down the rabbit hole of idioms here--technicalities far beyond what the GMAT expects you to know. We can use "years" without a prepositionLess than 35 years since . . . = concise & elegantIt's a little awkward to have just the prepositionIn less than 35 years since . . . = not 100% wrong, but a little offBUT, if we add the definite article, then we get a construction that sounds very sophisticated:In less than the 35 years since . . . = correct & sophisticated, but more wordyThe definite article reifies that block of time, turns it into a definitive single lump of something. This is a very elegant way of speaking, very sophisticated, although admittedly, it's a bit wordy. It's a little more typical of highly adorned academic writing then of business writing, which tends to be more terse and to-the-point. Again, all this is leagues beyond what you need to know for the GMAT.

The upshot is that (C) is perfect, elegant, and 100% grammatically correct--this certainly could be correct on the GRE, for example. Again, it is a fancy academic way of conveying the information. Conceivably it might be a correct GMAT SC answer on its own. It's only problem is that it is wordy, baggy, and indirect, so it looks sick by comparison with (A). Whereas (C) is fancy and highfalutin, (A) is direct, terse, and clear--much more in line with the GMAT's standards. There is no doubt that (A) is the best answer of the five.

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

13 Feb 2017, 13:52

mikemcgarry wrote:

Dear Mo2men,

I'm happy to respond.

We are going deep down the rabbit hole of idioms here--technicalities far beyond what the GMAT expects you to know. We can use "years" without a prepositionLess than 35 years since . . . = concise & elegantIt's a little awkward to have just the prepositionIn less than 35 years since . . . = not 100% wrong, but a little offBUT, if we add the definite article, then we get a construction that sounds very sophisticated:In less than the 35 years since . . . = correct & sophisticated, but more wordyThe definite article reifies that block of time, turns it into a definitive single lump of something. This is a very elegant way of speaking, very sophisticated, although admittedly, it's a bit wordy. It's a little more typical of highly adorned academic writing then of business writing, which tends to be more terse and to-the-point. Again, all this is leagues beyond what you need to know for the GMAT.

The upshot is that (C) is perfect, elegant, and 100% grammatically correct--this certainly could be correct on the GRE, for example. Again, it is a fancy academic way of conveying the information. Conceivably it might be a correct GMAT SC answer on its own. It's only problem is that it is wordy, baggy, and indirect, so it looks sick by comparison with (A). Whereas (C) is fancy and highfalutin, (A) is direct, terse, and clear--much more in line with the GMAT's standards. There is no doubt that (A) is the best answer of the five.

Does all this make sense?Mike

Dear Mike,Thanks for help and support as usual

Actually I hoped you can shed some light on the following grammar construction in choice C:

In less than..........since African honeybees had been released................ had migrated

As far as I learned, what comes after 'since' is 'Past simple' or 'certain points such as: month, year..etc' NOT 'past prefect', especially that the main clause of the sentence has 'past prefect'.

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Feb 2017, 12:09

1

Mo2men wrote:

Dear Mike,Thanks for help and support as usual

Actually I hoped you can shed some light on the following grammar construction in choice C:

In less than..........since African honeybees had been released................ had migrated

As far as I learned, what comes after 'since' is 'Past simple' or 'certain points such as: month, year..etc' NOT 'past prefect', especially that the main clause of the sentence has 'past prefect'.

Can you help clarify please??

Dear Mo2men,

I'm happy to respond.

The subordinate conjunction "since" helps to establish a time order, so this makes it less likely that the verb in that clause would be in the past perfect. I wouldn't make a 100% black/white rule out of this, but it certainly is a tendency.

In this question, curiously, the main verb is in the past perfect. Presumably this is because of what is happening in the tenses of other sentences around this sentence in whatever the original source might be. The GMAT really doesn't give us any rules for how to deal with this unusual situation--if the main clause has a past perfect verb, how do we show that another action in a subordinate clause is earlier? Notice that the GMAT sidesteps this entire issue in the OA, which involves a prepositional phrase rather than a subordinate clause.

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]

Show Tags

25 Feb 2017, 14:18

1

Hi All, I have a very basic doubt regarding the antecedent of pronoun "their ". We donot have any clear antecedent subject for their. I mean what we have is "the release of African honeybees", can African honeybees work as antecedent of their ?

I know its a very basic question but please respond.

Thanks in advance.

gmatclubot

Re: Less than 35 years after the release of African honeybees outside Sao
[#permalink]
25 Feb 2017, 14:18